Criar configuração de split Pix

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to repeat those. The description adds useful behavioral context: it defines participants and distribution criteria, and should be used before linking. There is no contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description consists of two concise sentences in Portuguese, effectively communicating the purpose and usage without any redundant information. It is well-structured and efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description adequately explains the tool's purpose and when to use it. Although it does not describe return values, an output schema exists to cover that. Given the tool's complexity (nested objects), the description is complete enough for an agent to understand its role and prerequisites.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds general context ('define participantes e critérios de distribuição') but does not provide additional meaning beyond what is already detailed in the input schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Cria' (creates), the resource 'configuração de split' (split configuration), and the context of use before linking to Pix charges. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pix_split_link_charge by specifying that this tool is for creation only.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use: 'Use antes de vinculá-la a cobranças Pix que devam repartir valores recebidos.' This implies that the tool should be used before linking to charges that need splitting. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the context is clear from sibling names.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.